For decades, I have contemplated a Sidereal astrology "master work," bringing together everything I have to say - everything I think needs to be in the package - for presentation of Sidereal astrology for the current generation and those that come after. I frankly don't know if I will ever do this in my life.

However, what is more likely - more feasible - is to build it in layers. By this plan, at some point (hopefully not too far down the road, perhaps in the next year or two), I would simply collate the core interpretive materials into a reference volume with neglible commentary. Then, take that and expand it by adding basic theoretical discussions first, and then showing how to bring them together at the end.

I just spent half an hour jotting an outline (subject to change, of course). I thought I would post it here for various reasons - (1) To have a place to store it. (2) To let everyone see what I'm thinking about. (3) To invite discussion. (4) Because I think it would serve as a suitable class plan for teaching Sidereal natal astrology (primarily the Book 2 outline below).

Anyway, here it is, posted... for whatever good it might do.

Book Level 1
Working title: SIDEREAL NATAL INTERPRETATIONS

1. Foreword or preface explaining the concept of the booklet
2. Discussion of chart priorities, the two bounded/unbounded groups of factors as in ISR
-- That is, signs/houses vs. aspects/angularity
3. PLANETARY ANGULARITY - interpretations
-- Briefest remarks on what constitutes angularity, the model, some stuff from SMA probably, "The Grounds"
-- Then the interpretations
4. ASPECT INTERPRETATIONS - the concise ones that I have already done for Sun/Moon (finishing the others).
-- Possibly some statistical footnotes, maybe not.
-- Probably 3-column system to orient.
-- Brief introductory remarks explaining which aspects, their priority and distinctions,
-- Orbs: closer is stronger, organize in 3 cols, etc.
5. SIGN INTERPRETATIONS
-- a. Sun-sign
-- b. Moon-sign
-- c. Mars-sign
6. FURTHER - Mention this is the first layer of rolling out something more comprehensive & my next goal is to replace it
APP A. TRANSIT INTERPRETATIONS
APP B. SYNASTRY INTERPRETATIONS

1. Foreword or preface explaining the concept of the book
2. Discussion of chart priorities, the two bounded/unbounded groups of factors as in ISR
-- That is, signs/houses vs. aspects/angularity
-- Each later section will discuss how to identify the most important expressions of each group in a given chart
3. PLANETARY ANGULARITY - THEORY
-- What constitutes angularity, the model, some stuff from SMA probably, "The Grounds"
-- whatever is needed for a reasonably full statement
-- How to identify the most important planetary angularities in a chart and rank them
4. PLANETARY ANGULARITY - INTERPRETATIONS
5. ASPECT - THEORY
-- Aspect theory. Which ones, their priority and distinctions.
-- Orbs. Sinusoidal model. Closer is stronger. Organizing in orb ranges for priority.
-- Confirm how to identify the most important planetary aspects in a chart and rank them
6. ASPECT INTERPRETATION THEORY
-- 3-column system to orient fully introduced (now retroactively including angularity).
7. ASPECT INTERPRETATIONS - the concise ones that I have already done for Sun/Moon (all 45 copied from Book 1)
8. THE CONSTELLATIONS or SIGNS - THEORY
-- Confirmation of the 12 x 30 is statistically solid. Orbless.
-- Essential nature by planetary rulership and exaltation
-- Quadruplicities
-- Archetypal structures (MAYBE!??! - or it could be a distraction - decide later)
-- How to identify the most important sign placements
9. SIGN INTERPRETATIONS
-- a. Sun-sign
-- b. Moon-sign
-- c. Mars-sign
-- d. Brief remarks on Mercury & Venus signs
10. HOUSES IN THEORY ^ PRACTICE
-- Briefest of discussions, emphasizing that there is no statistical confirmation as with the others.
-- MAYBE (!?) include my house model as a theoretical background
-- Give my Sun & Moon house interpretations
-- End with further caveats and cautions
11. A WORKING EXAMPLE
-- One or more working examples that don't interpret in full so much as they show how to do the extractions.
-- First, show the extraction of the most important factors in each category.
-- Second, mention second pass of going planet by planet to assess.
-- Third, encourage individual style to unfold (but rigor during training).
-- Throughout, emphasize the person that has already formulated themselves and is trying to emerge through self-expression.
12. FURTHER - Mention this is the second layer of rolling out something more comprehensive
-- But the time until a "Book 3" next layer is indeterminate. I wouldn't even try to estimate it right now.

The final vision I've been sitting on for several decades, a kind of "A to Z," would look something like this. It's ambitious (hugely so). Each heading below breaks into numerous smaller chapters. All interpretations are thrown into a reference section at the end, rather than mingled throughout.

Each section of discussion would have layered material - something like beginner, intermediate, advanced. It would be clear from the beginning that how matters were discussed would not be "the whole truth" at first, but would be "working truth." That is, Sidereal astrology especially benefits from a crisp simplicity - often benefitting from an excessively simplified way of addressing something - and I don't want to lose that. On the other hand, there are much bigger complexities that are actual, that give depth, that integrate us with larger knowledge, and these can't be neglected in a comprehensive work. The way of handling this I've long contemplated is, for each topic, to first present what amounts to "Act like the following is true, run with this instruction until you have lots of experience and are really good with it. Then add the next layer."

So, the beginner layer would be roughly what you find in The New Instant Astrologer, the "classic Sidereal crisp" style.

The intermediate layer of teaching would take these same points and go deeper into them, speaking "nothing but the truth" (perhaps not yet "the whole truth," but at least "nothing but the truth") about each topic. E.g., instead of saying, "Trines and sextiles are just usually a lot weaker than conjunctions, oppositions, and squares" - which is an enormously useful lie for practical purposes! - it would go into the particular qualitative distinctions of aspect families. Or, as another example, move from "Look at what is on the angles" to "Here are the nuances of the various relative angularity zones throughout the chart." This would still keep on solid, well-demonstrated, we'll-substantiated material, but would round it out. (But I really don't think people should start there, or build their sense of astrological verity at this level.)

A third, advanced layer would add a great deal more, including topics off the Sidereal mainstream (easy examples: midpoints, potential additional planets and factors, Vertex, subharmonic aspect series, and goodness knows what else). Still presented in the spirit of Fagan & Bradley thinking but addressing things about which people have curiosity, and about which there is something - pro, con, or indifferent - to say. Again, the idea would be, "Stay away from this stuff until you have the intermediate layer solidly established. This stuff could screw you up! <g>"

These would all be in one shared chapter, somehow distinguished by layout and tricks of the publisher's trade, e.g., page edgings of bleed bars for thumbing.

FWIW... that's the big dream. Don't know if it will beat the bucket. Might as well write all this down so it's "out there" in the world.

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:Do you have substantially different things to say about natal astrology than are laid out in NIA?

TNIA shows a fair representation of the basic level. I wouldn't dramatically change that, though I'd change some of it. More importantly, I would present it different - clear up some things, tie into the technical model better - and let this "basic approach" level exist in the context of deeper information.

What TNIA includes is not at odds with how I interpret charts, but it represents a minority subset and doesn't coordinate the pieces well. (Aside from the fact that I didn't know how to write, and the interpretive material needs sharpening and bringing up to date, as I've slowly done through the interpretive sections of this forum.)

Do you have substantially different things to say about solar returns than are laid out in ISR?

Not really. I made shade it slightly differently by under-emphasizing the "first pass" look only because I think that has caused confusion in people's minds about the larger picture. (In particular, I see people applying "first pass" logic to Lunar Returns, to which it was never intended to be applied.)

Or will this be more updates and additions to your earlier work?

Ultimately, I want a work that ignores the fact that I ever wrote anything on the subject before.

Because if that's the case, perhaps you might start with a master work on progressions and transits.

Won't work for a couple of reasons. First, without the core of the natal, these are totally off base. Second, one learns the approach to these from mastering natal astrology's basics first. Third, of all the areas of astrology, personal predictive work bores me the most, so I probably wouldn't ever be motivated to do it - and, most of the time, I'm doing it primarily from the point of view of evolving psychological trends relatable to the person who has the natal.

Without that foundation, I wouldn't know where to begin on such a topic, other than to just list the transit interpretation paragraphs that area already here on the site (with a short introduction on Inside-Outside theory and Fagan's Incidents-Accidents distinction for progressions vs. transits.) That's all of three pages.

Sort of fill in the gaps in the teaching materials first, then do the updates and additions thing.

I'd like to get TNIA out of people's minds. I think it was crucial that we get the sign information out, and the basics are there but, really, the book embarrasses me. (I'm fine if I get to tell somebody I was 20 years old when I wrote it <g>.)

And then maybe a nice book on lunar returns.

SLR book would have been the following: Review the intro parts in SSR book. Tighten it down by throwing out the "first pass" look, concentrate on dynamic factors only, consider only angular/foreground planets and their conjunctions / oppositions / squares to each other (including natals). Then rewrite the interpretations so they are (1) shaded to planet-conjunct-Moon instead of the planet-conjunct-Sun I used in writing the SSR interps, and (2) crisper, more eventish, less psychologically developmental, more transient, etc. that's the book in a nutshell.

In the Master Work I ultimately would like to do if given enough decades and time, this would be summarized in about two pages, which would be sufficient.

Edit: I was replying to the first message, and hadn't seen the second yet. I shall take that as a prediction.